Shortly after The Sixth Sense became a global sensation, its director, M Night Shyamalan – hailed on the cover of Newsweek in 2002 as “the next Spielberg” – told an interviewer that, years earlier, he had realised the one ingenious trick that made Steven Spielberg movies so spectacularly successful. Like a soft-drink manufacturer who had stumbled on the secret recipe for Coca-Cola, Shyamalan could not believe his luck. What was Spielberg’s killer formula, Shyamalan was asked. He would not say. Merely by understanding it, he had struck commercial gold and he did not plan to share it.
It didn’t quite work out that way for Shyamalan, who has never matched the heights of that first hit. But I thought of his imagined revelation as I watched Spielberg’s latest film. The Post stars Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks as Katharine Graham and Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post, the duo who took on the Nixon White House in 1971 to publish the Pentagon Papers, the US Department of Defense’s own secret history of the Vietnam war that laid bare decades of government dishonesty.
It is a timely, absorbing story, beautifully acted and masterfully told. But what is the essential ingredient that makes it a Spielberg movie? Where is the neat narrative trick that Shyamalan thought he had spotted, the trademark device that means The Post sits in a canon that includes Jaws, Indiana Jones and Schindler’s List?
Play Video 2:33 Watch the trailer for Steven Spielberg's The Post
Two days later, I am sitting opposite Spielberg – now 71 and looking like a kindly college professor, a sweater over his shirt and tie and under his jacket – about to ask the man himself. He is the most commercially successful director in cinema history, the man behind ET, Jurassic Park and dozens more. So what makes a Spielberg film?
He answers by noting that he recently saw Spielberg, a two-hour documentary by Susan Daly, detailing each stage of his storied career. “Even having looked at that documentary about myself, I still cannot honestly tell you what attracts me to a project and what presses my buttons and what gets me to say yes. I can’t tell you.”
Really? No clue as to what the common thread that connects his work might be?
“There’s a couple of movies that, yes, I see my dog tags around the neck of the film, like anything that has to do with dinosaurs or intrepid archaeologists.” But more widely? He shakes his head and smiles. “And I saw the documentary. And it didn’t help.”
As he told Daly, he doesn’t like to overanalyse his own work too much, for fear that the attempt to understand the source of all this creativity might cause it to dry up.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Meryl Streep, Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks on the set of The Post. Photograph: Niko Tavernise/Twentieth Century Fox
As it happens, The Post has a couple of Spielberg hallmarks. There is the familiar clash of idealism against pragmatism, the brave soul (or souls) ready to stand up for what’s right, against the vastly bigger forces pressing them to back down. In Bridge of Spies, Hanks was a lawyer pressured to cut corners who insisted, instead, on the primacy of the constitution. In The Post, Hanks is a journalist taking the same stand. (Both films join Lincoln as hymns to the virtues of the US constitution.) And – like those fleeing the shark, the dinosaurs, or the relentless truck in Spielberg’s debut movie, Duel – the good guys have to face down an implacable bully.
But The Post has an added quality that some earlier Spielberg movies may have lacked: an uncanny topicality. That is not wholly coincidental. The director first read the script for The Post just 11 months ago, deciding instantly that he wanted to make this story of a Republican president at war with the press – and he wanted to make it right now, assembling screenwriters, crew and A-list stars (including Streep and Hanks making their first film together) in a fraction of the usual time.
“The level of urgency to make the movie was because of the current climate of this administration, bombarding the press and labelling the truth as fake if it suited them,” Spielberg tells me, recalling the sense of offence he felt at documented, provable events being branded fake news. “I deeply resented the hashtag ‘alternative facts’, because I’m a believer in only one truth, which is the objective truth.”
So The Post shows a silhouetted Richard Nixon pacing the White House, while we hear the disgraced former president’s voice – taped on his own, notorious recording system – as he tramples on the first amendment, seeking to use the might of his office to hobble the free press. No one needs to mention Donald Trump for his shadow to loom over this movie.
Journalists will lap it up, of course. Like James Graham’s stage play Ink, it features one sequence lovingly recreating the old process of hot metal – the clanging of heavy, blackened machines – once necessary to produce a printed newspaper. For those who were inspired to go into the trade by Alan J Pakula’s All the President’s Men (“arguably the greatest newspaper movie ever made,” says Spielberg), with its heroic tale of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein exposing Watergate, The Post is a delicious prequel: it argues that the victory over the Pentagon Papers emboldened the Washington Post to keep fighting Nixon, all the way to his resignation in 1974. (For anyone who knew Bradlee, Hanks does not disappoint: he gets the macho swagger of the walk, the growl in the voice, just right.)
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Spielberg (centre) with Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks on the set of The Post. Photograph: Niko Tavernise/AP
But Spielberg insists his film is no nostalgia piece looking backward to the days when US journalism was in its pomp. “I think there’s a higher standard of journalism today than there even was then,” he says. For that he credits today’s competitive landscape, with the Post and the New York Times jostling daily for exclusives on the Trump White House. Back in 1971, that duel was, the director says, “a one-way street”. Bradlee was furious that the New York Times had beaten him to the Pentagon Papers, publishing them first. But to the Times, the Post was a provincial, local paper – barely a rival at all.
These days, says Spielberg, the old obstacles he details so painstakingly in his film – the need to have enough coins in your pocket to call a source from a payphone or the rigmarole of booking two seats on a plane to accommodate boxes filled with secret papers – have gone. But the inky hassles of what he calls the “analogue era of hard copy” have been replaced by new challenges, chiefly the sheer number of breaking stories and the speed of the news cycle, “which is less than 24 hours. Sometimes it’s 24 minutes. The intensity is tenfold what it used to be.”
If The Post feels timely, it is not solely because Americans are witnessing anew a pitched battle of president v press. The central human story of the film is the transformation of Graham, the Post’s owner – who had taken the helm of the paper only after her husband’s suicide – from a hesitant, self-doubting Washington society hostess, into a decisive, steely woman who refuses to be pushed around.
Accordingly, Spielberg repeatedly shows us Graham/Streep as the only woman in a room full of besuited men, interrupted by men, talked over and down to by men, even those supposedly junior to her. We watch as she develops the strength finally to turn around and say: “Enough.”
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Actor Oliwia Dabrowska (foreground) in Spielberg’s
1993 Holocaust drama Schindler’s List. Photograph: Allstar/Cinetext/Universal
When, in February 2017, Spielberg picked up The Post’s script, originally written by 31-year-old Liz Hannah, he can’t have known how resonant it would become.
“I didn’t know because the sexual assault tsunami hadn’t happened yet. Of course it had been happening for decades and decades, but this particular 8.2 earthquake had not yet occurred.”
Was he aware of what certain men were doing in his industry?
“Certainly aware of the existence probably all the way back to William Shakespeare’s time of the casting couch, and the prevalence of sexual abuse and sexual intimidation in the old Hollywood of the 1920s, 30s and 40s.”
But he has been a player in Hollywood for nearly 50 years. Surely he must have seen something?
“There was some inappropriate behaviour years and years ago inside my own company, which we dealt with and dismissed the person involved in that. But I’ve always had small companies with no more than 70 employees, and my companies have always been run by women. I find when companies are run by women, there’s less of a chance for men to get away with that kind of behaviour.”
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Spielberg’s 1982 film ET. Photograph: Allstar/UNIVERSAL/Sportsphoto Ltd./Allstar
And what about Harvey Weinstein himself? Surely that was not a surprise? “I knew that he was a bully, and I knew that he was a very intimidating competitor. But I learned for the first time about his sexual proclivities when I read the [New Yorker] story by Ronan Farrow.”
There is one scene in The Post that Spielberg tells me he improvised on the day. Graham is leaving the supreme court after the fateful ruling in the newspaper’s favour. A huge crowd of anti-Nixon protesters has gathered and, as she goes down the stairs, several young women spontaneously form a kind of guard of honour, lining her route. It rams home the point that Graham should be seen as a feminist role model, blazing a trail for the next generation.
Some have found that scene a little over-egged, as if Spielberg couldn’t help but lay on an extra coating of sentimentality. It is a familiar accusation against the director, one that has dogged him for decades. But these days he leans into it. He owns it. That becomes clear when I ask him why he thinks the Spielberg biography by film critic Molly Haskell was published in Yale University Press’s Jewish Lives series. Has his been a Jewish life? Does his work have a Jewish sensibility?
“Well, Jews by and large have a sentimental quality. We also love high drama. I think both of those things are evident in most of my work.”
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones in Spielberg’s 1981 film Raiders of the Lost Ark. Photograph: Ronald Grant Archive
There’s another way of looking at this question of sentimentality. Somehow Spielberg manages to peer quite hard into the dark and nevertheless find a point of light. It is wrong to think he shies away from the darkness: his subjects have included the Holocaust, slavery and domestic violence. (In 1994, he founded the Shoah Foundation, which is committed to recording on video the testimonies of survivors of the Nazi Holocaust, as well as of genocides in Rwanda, Cambodia and elsewhere.) But he also ensures that audiences leave every Spielberg film with their spirits lifted. What is that about?
He smiles. “Well, look. To be Jewish, you have to be optimistic, because if you’re not we would have perished in the desert. We’d never have reached the end of that 40-year hike. We would all have perished without optimism.”
Spielberg has plenty of it, planning for the release of sci-fi blockbuster Ready Player One, the film he interrupted to make The Post, and scanning scripts for the countless other movies he wants to make after that. Correction: not necessarily movies.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Dennis Weaver in Spielberg’s 1971 film Duel. Photograph: Allstar/Universal Television
“I’d like to do a 10-hour miniseries very much,” he says when we talk about the current surge in top-quality television. He has been looking, “but I haven’t found one yet”. With excitement, he volunteers the titles of his current three favourite shows: The Crown, The Handmaid’s Tale and Big Little Lies. I suggest that The Crown is not unlike The Post: the story of a woman thrust into a powerful role she never expected. Another smile: “I see some of the echo between Her Majesty and Her Majesty of The Washington Post.”
We talk about the nervy, “nerdy” boy Spielberg was as a child; the way he was bullied, singled out for particular abuse as one of the few Jewish kids in his Arizona suburb; about the 8mm movie camera he discovered aged 12 or 13, which became “the antidote to being bullied”. But, before long, we are talking once more about his country.
He is excited about the prospect of an Oprah Winfrey run for the presidency. He thinks she would be “absolutely brilliant”. Indeed, he refuses to sink into the bleak despair of so many of his fellow Hollywood liberals.
“Our country has gone through all kinds of crises, and we’ve always bounced back from them. We are going to bounce back from this, no doubt. This is something we will look back on, we will make movies about. We’ll tell these stories. These will be lessons to our children of what not to do and how not to comport oneself. But we will absolutely bounce back and we will recover. All the damage being done today is reversible.”
He doesn’t fear for the republic?
“At this moment in my life right now, with all my experience behind me, no, I do not fear for the republic.”
Our time is up, we shake hands – but not before he has checked to make sure my machine has recorded our conversation (“I’ve got your back”) – and we say goodbye. And it takes me a while to realise that with that last, hopeful glimpse of life after Trump, he has done it again. Even now, in a 45-minute interview to promote his new film, Steven Spielberg has supplied a Spielberg ending.
Stuart McGurk is GQ's Associate Editor and the 2017 PPA Magazine Writer of the Year. Follow him on Twitter @stuartmcgurk
It was, depending on your point of view, a marketing ploy, a counterinsurgency by serious cinema in the age of The Emoji Movie or Hollywood's real-life equivalent of the Avengers assembling, only with Steven Spielberg as Nick Fury. On 6 March, 45 days after Donald Trump's inauguration as the US's 45th president, it was announced that Spielberg would suspend post-production on his long-awaited sci-fi epic Ready Player One and instead direct a film about the Pentagon Papers.
The film, about the Washington Post's war with the White House over their 1971 publication of top-secret military documents, would see Tom Hanks (as Post editor Ben Bradlee) and Meryl Streep (as its publisher, Katharine Graham) tackle prominent issues, such as the role of a free press, the morality of leaks and the dividing line between national security and national interest. You imagine everyone involved would have had to resist mouthing to camera, "This is actually about now."
Advertisement
That Hollywood would react to the Trump era is no surprise. But that an industry that considers a decade or three in development to be a standard office workflow has managed to kick into gear, within weeks, is almost without precedent. The Post has snuck in just before the Oscar deadline and arrives on UK screens today (January 19th). What's more remarkable is that it's not alone. George Clooney's Suburbicon, for instance, which also uses a period piece to tell the tale of today, came out last November.
© Sony Pictures/Entertainment Pictures/ZUMAPRESS.com
The film, says Clooney, was inspired by Trump's angry campaign speeches "about building fences and scapegoating minorities". The result is a resurrected and updated Coen brothers script from the Eighties based on the true story of William and Daisy Myers, a black family who were terrorised after moving to the suburban idyll of Levittown, Pennsylvania in 1957.
Read next 10 coolest things this week: from a Cotodama Lyric Speaker to gourment popcorn type-gallery 10 coolest things this week: from a Cotodama Lyric Speaker to gourment popcorn What you should be buying this week.
Trump was elected during shooting and crew members would say, "It's too bad it's not coming out today." But then, of course, came Charlottesville and the kind of relevance no one would wish for. "Unfortunately," Clooney said, "these issues never get old."
It begs the question, out of the worst of times, might we get the best of Hollywood? After all, 1976's All The President's Men was only made because of all the president's corruption.
More films are in the pipeline. There's Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down The White House - about the Watergate source Deep Throat - while Rob Reiner's LBJ will star Woody Harrelson as the former vice president taking office after JFK's assassination.
Advertisement
But don't expect a film to tackle the Trump era head-on any time soon. After all, good cinema needs perspective. The first major films about 9/11 - World Trade Center and United 93 - didn't arrive until five years after the event.
Recently, I asked Alec Baldwin if he could see himself playing Trump in a dramatic film. He said no; he didn't feel Trump was worthy of that kind of attention. "The comedians," he told me, "will have it covered." He's probably right.
Expect, rather, a film that begins on an office door, with a nameplate that says Robert Mueller III. Expect it to be directed by Spielberg and Mueller to be played by Tom Hanks.
Like this? Now read:
Timothee Chalamet has just helped end Woody Allen's career
Advertisement
Watch Liam Neeson rank his on-screen characters' very particular set of skills
Martin McDonagh, interviewed by an In Bruges obsessive
The Post (12A)
Verdict: Powerful thriller
Rating:
The title character in Steven Spielberg’s new thriller is a newspaper, which might not sound to everyone like the stuff of which thrills are made.
A fondly remembered 1976 thriller about the same newspaper, The Washington Post, was more racily called All The President’s Men.
Of course, for those of us who work for them, hardly anything could be more thrilling than newspapers.
Last week, I went to the premiere of The Post and to the after-show party, which was full of well-known media folk buzzing around excitedly, having just had their entire careers validated by the great Spielberg and his mighty stars, Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks. One veteran Radio 4 presenter seemed in danger of combusting with self-importance.
The Post is a film about the Washington Post and the tough decision the paper faced on whether to publish the Pentagon Papers
So maybe journalists aren’t the best qualified people to review The Post, which is about the value of bold journalism. Moreover, it is not only a thriller about the risk the paper took in publishing the leaked Pentagon Papers in 1971, but also a romance about the heady days of hot metal and typesetting by hand.
The Pentagon Papers were classified documents, thousands of pages of them, which revealed lots of damning details about the still-raging Vietnam War that the U.S. government had kept secret — not least the conviction in the highest political echelons, even as more military personnel were packed off to fight, that the conflict could never be won.
That’s the essence of the story, with The Washington Post having to judge whether the cause of public interest was worth going into battle itself, with the Nixon White House.
But it’s not at all fanciful — in fact, Spielberg more or less confirmed it at the premiere — also to see the film as a two-hour rebuke to Donald Trump for his shrill cry of ‘fake noos’ every time the media says something he dislikes.
Even as a newspaperman, though, I’ll try to be objective and resist the urge to stand up and salute as I write that The Post, rather like the brilliant 2015 movie Spotlight (co-written by Josh Singer, who is also the co-writer here with Liz Hannah) affirms the importance to a society of any institution which shines the dazzling torch of truth into the murky broom cupboards of corruption, conspiracy and cover-up.
I don’t think this is quite a great film, however, so much as a good film with great things in it. Unsurprisingly, with 25 Academy Award nominations already between them, these include one splendid performance of Streepish intensity and another of Hanksian integrity.
Streep plays Katharine Graham, the well-connected socialite who owned The Post, which she inherited from her father. Her husband had taken the reins but committed suicide some years earlier, leaving her nominally in charge.
Tom Hanks (pictured) plays the editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee with Meryl Streep playing Katharine Graham, the owner of the Post
But as the whistle-blowing drama unfolds, the company is going public and Graham is trying, uneasily, to assert her authority over some stuffy bow-tied reactionaries in the boardroom. Streep plays her beautifully, as a woman of strong principle but nervy conviction.
Hanks is the paper’s editor, Ben Bradlee. As it happens, I spent an hour interviewing Bradlee myself in the early Nineties, in his office at The Post, so I can testify to the accurate way in which Hanks growls and plonks his expensive brogues up on his desk.
I can still recall wincing when I realised that the microphone on my tape-recorder was pointing directly at the bottom of his shoe.
Bradlee was a Harvard-educated patrician, born into New England wealth and privilege, but also as tough and salty-tongued as a stevedore. Nobody will ever play him better than Jason Robards in All The President’s Men, who had the advantage of looking strikingly like him, but Hanks gives it his considerable best shot.
The picture revolves around the relationship between Bradlee and Graham, which is founded on immense mutual respect but also her willingness to let him get on with the job as he thinks best. The Pentagon Papers, leaked to The Post by a former State Department employee, Daniel Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys), threaten the latter part of this equation.
Bradlee aggressively wants to publish, partly to get one over the rival New York Times, which also has the papers, but is gagged by a White House injunction.
Graham, thinking of The Post’s future, is much more circumspect. She is also compromised by her close friendship with the former Defence Secretary Robert McNamara (Bruce Greenwood) whose reputation seems certain to be damaged, if not destroyed, by the documents.
The first third or so of the movie gets a little bogged down in scene-setting, beginning with a flashback to Ellsberg’s own visit to the Vietnam front line in 1966.
Unless you’re already well-acquainted with the story, it’s pretty challenging to follow, until it smooths out into a will-they-won’t-they narrative which Spielberg masterfully ensures is not undermined by us knowing, or being able to guess, the ending.
Coincidentally, his own feature-length directing debut, Duel, came out in the same year as the Pentagon Papers, but if the subsequent 47 years have taught us anything about him, it’s that he doesn’t need sinister trucks, or even great white sharks, to generate suspense.
In this film what he mostly needs are telephones, which he also uses shamelessly to convey a sense of period.
‘Could I trouble you to use your telephone?’ asks Graham at one point; eight words which whisk us back into that dim past before mobiles.
Later, Bob Odenkirk — terrific as the reporter Ben Bagdikian who tracks Ellsberg down — has almost slapstick fun trying to get coins into a payphone.
We also hear Nixon himself, the real Nixon, thundering paranoiacally into his Oval Office phone.
In fact, the Pentagon Papers don’t implicate him; they cover a period before he became president. But Spielberg doesn’t let him off the hook, either telephonically or morally.
The film ends with a break-in at the Democratic Party HQ in the Watergate building, allowing us all the smug satisfaction of knowing what happens next.
